Sydney Morning Herald columnist

Even though Malcolm Turnbull is being ostentatiously loyal to his leader, he cannot abstain from remarking on the fact that he is very popular without actually saying he is more popular than his leader, Tony Abbott.

On Monday night it was only a matter of time before Turnbull alluded, ever so sweetly, to his popularity credentials during an orgy of coyness shared between Turnbull and his fellow popular-but-deposed leader Kevin Rudd on the ABC's Q&A program.

Turnbull: ''Those people who say they'd rather I was the leader of my party or Kevin the leader of his, and there are, apparently, a handful that do.'' Boyish grin.

Later, badgered by the host over the leadership issue - because political journalists are addicted to leadership speculation - Turnbull said: ''I've had thousands and thousands of people propose that, you know, I should set up a new political party…'' But he will stay true to the Liberals.

Advertisement

Throughout the show a stream of distracting gush via Twitter run across the screen about how Rudd and Turnbull were more impressive than their party leaders. All the earnest speculation about these two former and potential leaders has even been given a name - Ruddbull.

It's mostly bull.

Turnbull has three strikes against him. His federal parliamentary colleagues don't trust him. He has a reputation, deserved or not, for self-absorption. When he was the leader he reached the second-lowest approval rating in the history of Newspoll - 14 per cent - in November 2009. Shortly after he lost the leadership.

It was Abbott who saved the Coalition from going over an electoral cliff, Abbott who caused the political earthquake which transformed federal politics in 2010, and Abbott who erased Labor's 18-seat majority in the 2010 campaign, fought to a 72-seat draw in the House, and led the Coalition to victory in the popular vote for the Senate.

After two years in opposition, the Coalition remains positioned to win the next election. Western Sydney remains a death zone for Labor. Abbott will be retooling his leadership style to become less relentlessly pugnacious. Besides, any leadership coup by the Liberals would have the taint of cynicism, thanks to Labor's own use of the tactic. Labor has poisoned that well.

Rudd, too, has three strikes against him. His parliamentary colleagues will not tolerate his overbearing, supercilious ego. His resignation as Foreign Minister and leadership tilt in February was a debacle. And Labor has run out of leadership shuffles.

Because they don't have the pressure of leadership, it was enjoyable watching Rudd and Turnbull in comradely discussion, the opposite of what Rudd called ''the rolling Punch and Judy Show''.

However, I watched Q&A not because of Rudd and Turnbull but because it had two policy heavyweights who weren't courting popularity, Judith Sloan and Heather Ridout. Sloan is an economist and prominent columnist. Ridout is the former head of the Australian Industry Group and now on the board of the Reserve Bank.

Between them, they had the most telling insights about where the country is going wrong.

Ridout: ''During the last 10 years, we've turned ourselves into a pretty expensive place to do business. In my old job, one of my members told me recently of the 44 countries in the world that he does business, Australia is the most expensive.''

Ridout: ''Everyone needs to realise we have 125 taxes in Australia. We collect 90 per cent of our taxation from 10 of them … we have to have a proper national debate, not the ridiculous debate we had after the release of the Henry report …''

After an outburst of agreement on the panel about the need to spend more on education, Sloan mercifully injected some reality: ''I think it's important that someone rain on this parade … We spent 40 per cent more per capita on education over the past decade or so and our school performance declined. So the answers are not just in money.''

Ridout: ''The Fair Work Act gives 120 new rights to unions and nothing to employers.''

Sloan: ''Since the Fair Work Act has been fully implemented, we've had a declining rate of labour force participation, which is a real concern … Only 13 per cent of the private sector work force belong to unions, so it's absolutely strange that you would have a piece of legislation which seems to assume that everyone belongs to a union and the right of unions is paramount and sacrosanct … [while] small business are really doing it tough.''

Her point about small business is the most important political reality of all.

Postscript: This morning Turnbull pointed out that his approval rating bottomed at 25 per cent, not 14, and was 36 per cent at the time he lost the leadership.

123 comments

Oh wow - since the return to Fair Work Choices there has been a declining participation rate - has this woman not noticed the GFC?

And as the Industrial Relations changes reversed the Work Choices Act which gave privileges to Employers but not to Employees, would you expect it to grant new privileges to employers?

Sheehan - you called these people heavyweights. What would you call someone who actually said something sensible - blockbusters?

Commenter

Ross

Location

MALLABULA

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:00AM

@Ross,

I work with numerous companies Ross that are very hesitant to employ "full-time" permanent employees - DUE to Fair Work Australia rules. They now prefer to employ on contract basis and use temp agencies.

The pendulum was too far to the employer under WorkChoices, but is now too far to the employee under the current Act.

Commenter

recruiter

Location

Sydney

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:21AM

I do love the scent of napalm on Thursdays, when Mr Sheen saddles up, checks his six-shooters, and flies off into unreality. Rudd was all over the others. Urbane, intelligent, measured, he was completely across his facts. He outpaced Turnbull, and made Sloan and Ridout seem irrelevant.

Ridout has taken her old job into her new one - she was champion Mouth for the Employers - and sounds silly when she says that Fair Work gives 120 new rights to workers. Some might say ... that after Work Choices (which removed 509) that Howard dumped 100 years of workers protection, so the 120 "new" rights gets us back to where we were before the Goths.

As for Sloan ... she thinks that good working conditions are only for unions members? All others should be stripped and work in the conditions of Pakistan, with the wages of Pakistan?

One more ... "high cost economy" is a dog whistle for "high wage" economy. Conservatives - bless their uneducated hearts - forget that high wages means high consumption, means profits and ability to pay for milk, bread and road tolls. Unlike the US, with lots of low wage strugglers who can't buy huouses, where Keynesian or monetary polciy doesn't work, except to slide any "easing" into the trousers of the elite. Dumb economics

Commenter

Axis

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:26AM

Ross Kevin and the stimulus saved us from the GFC, remember?

Youth unemployment is high and has been for too long, business will not hire if they cannot fire without too much red tape.

Unions cover a small percentage of the workforce and have a disproportionate amount of influence. Ridout and Sloan said it like it is, time to make big changes to IR.

Commenter

mayday

Location

sydney

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:31AM

Ross, your comments are typical of the head in the sand attitude that will see Labor trounced at the next election. There is a reality out there - it is called Gillard over reaching on the Fair Work Act to reward unions who both support and at times directly or indirectly dictate Labor policies. With comments like yours from the left, Labor are so gone at the next election. Add to this the plethora of other policy failures, cash blowouts and scandals surrounding Labor's administration, no wonder the country eagerly awaits to punish incompetence at the next election, irrespective of who leads the coalition.

Commenter

Tim of Altona

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:40AM

Ross,

Go to the bureau of statistics website and have a look at the "Days Lost Due to Industrial Relations Disputes" stats. That is the real impact of the union favoured legislation. But what else would you expect from a front bench directed by the unions.

Commenter

Jimc

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:52AM

recruiter - you may be right but that does not change the fact that Paul Sheehan admires the most banal of commentary and commends it to us as though it was insight.

Kevin and the stimulus may have saved us from the GFC, but we still live in a staggering global economy.

Has anyone including Sloan and Riddout considered other effects on employment and business expense such as the exchange rate?

Have they considered the costs of CEO's and directors that may make us uncompetitive.

I too an an employer. I have had trouble firing a malicious and unsatisfactory employee, but Fair Work did not make it any harder.

Commenter

Ross

Location

MALLABULA

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 7:54AM

@Ross - they don't cease to be "heavyweights" just because you don't agree with them.

Commenter

wennicks

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 8:14AM

RecruiterYou conveniently forget that there was near zero growth in full time positions under work choices. Low growth is better than no growth.And you also forget that employers are wanting flexibility - hence the casual and part time work growth. Full time work growth is a blunt statistic that means nothing any more.

Commenter

Steve

Date and time

November 22, 2012, 8:17AM

@Recruiter, then their management is woeful. Good employee management solves issues, if you're worried about the regulatory regime that much I'd have to ask how bad are those companies' relationships with their employees? Managememt in this country is poor and people management is woeful. There are a few companies that get it and they show the results: low absenteeism, low OH&S incidents, low stress leave, low turn-over, high engagement and productivity. Employers who think that tinkering with the IR regime (which has been going on for decades with almost no impact on IR matrices) really need to take a good hard look at themselves.